I would like to kick off the discussion with the issue of political parties and political participation in Cyprus. This will eventually be the cornerstone of a debate to follow on political dynamics in Cyprus in view of the upcoming presidential elections in 2008 and the people and issues that will dominate the scene.
While the general belief is that Cypriots are, by-and-large, "political animals" and follow local politics closely mainly due to the Cyprus issue; political participation and active political involvement is still exercised mainly through the political parties. Although one can argue that it is natural for individuals interested in politics to express and practice their interest through organized groups that share a common ideology and a common set of values and a common agenda, these groups in Cyprus have always been structured as political parties. For example, in Cyprus there is no organization, either in the form of an NGO or a special interest group, that can compete in terms of influence or authority with the political parties. It seems that the political party is the only existing vehicle through which a person or a group of persons can pursue their objectives. This is even more evident with the translation of the various political parties into all kinds of groups and associations within other institutional structures such as trade unions, student unions, environmental groups, sports clubs, special interest groups such as farmers, etc.
In short, political parties in Cyprus are the only "accepted" and "recognized" forms of political organization and participation in public life. All other forms of political organization wishing to express an opinion or promote a particular policy have to do so through the parties, which are the dominant forces in the public discourse. The alternative option for these non-party groups is to become parties themselves in order to "legitimize" their public political presence as "credible" interlocutors in the political process. The process of becoming a party, of course, forces an organized group to branch out in other policy areas and eventually to actively seek to participate in power sharing and "horse trading."
Is this a politically "healthy" characteristic of civic life? Does that help prevent special interests from developing a "life of their own" and subsequently manipulating political outcomes according to their wishes? Is there a subject of public debate or concern strong enough to let people move away from political parties but remain engaged with politics through other forms of organization? Will we ever see groups of people that share a common objective over a specific issue or set of issues existing simultaneously across party lines? Will the Cyprus issue (considering the result of the referendum on the Annan plan) become such an issue and affect the way people approach the parties in the next presidential election? Is there any issue in the Cyprus public debate strong enought to force people to organize across party lines?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Congratulations to the future long life, hopefully, of your blog.
As per your assesment of the lack of NGOs in Cyprus, with influence, versus the political parties who hold the real influence over people. Would this also explain why Cypriots are still resistant to globalization (i.e. give in to Turkey because America-Europe-Israel-UN says so...) through the many NGOs that promote foreign agendas for Cyprus, the Cypriot rejection of the Annan Plan is a prime example, many NGOs from America and many Greek so-called Greek-Turkish friendship commitees and at least one American University (namely Portland State University which takes Turkish gov't grants) lobbied FOR the Annan Plan.
Isn't Cyprus better off without American and Soros et al. funded and supported NGOs, influencing people?
Thank you for your encouraging words and your comment. The sources of funding and ideological direction of NGOs or any similar non governmental entities, particularly those that specifically target democratically elected governments abroad, in most cases reveal a lot about their agenda and real intentions.
That being said however, the question whether politically active citizens who share a common position on an important issue, but not necessarily the same ideology or set of values, can reach to each other across party lines, remains. What could be the result of this, and its effects on the political dynamics in Cyprus in an election year? Will it affect the positioning of the parties and the candidates across the policy spectrum and how?
"Is this a politically "healthy" characteristic of civic life? Does that help prevent special interests from developing a "life of their own" and subsequently manipulating political outcomes according to their wishes?"
I would say that I agree with your statement at the current situation in Cyprus, both in the north and south. This is due to many reasons and the main ones are the geographical and demographic disadvantages.
I guess with the given facts:
1- small population,
2- funding issues,
3- misdirection by any kind of 3rd party,
4- globalization,
5- overall power struggle all over the world,
6- philosophy and psychology
Cyprus is driven by political parties and mostly the people who run the parties.
I am from north. I personally do not see any problem with north or south and etc. I am trying to summarize things at a point of view taken from higher point. There are people with different sex, religions, nations, colors and etc living in the same countries.
There are no boundaries anymore with the globalization and emerging advanced technology such as internet. Or capitalism wants to grow more and faster, which directs both EU and the USA to open into other countries to increase the markets (wider and international market)... and etc
Annan plan or not, this or that, what if my name was in Greek and what if I was born 10 miles away.
The problem we all have is, we are being misdirected with the momentum, or with emotions or by the political parties.
Most of the political parties in less advanced countries, utilize the national feelings to keep people in smaller groups or in groups. That makes it easier to misdirect or use for their own interest, which may be good or bad.
I do share the same feeling as Basil. It is same in both sides. North is being manipulated by Turkey in a different ways we may know or not. South is being manipulated in a different way or not.. In the end, the civilians do not have much saying.
Political parties should serve the public and perhaps the NGOs should act as a bridge and etc. My observations in the north are, the parties do what is the best interest for them. Again, this may not be a fair statement for them, as I may not have all the facts or information, however, this is what it seems like.
Basil,
the political party system in Cyprus is incapable of acting apolitically, which we can see quite clearly from the myriad of government 'fumbles' regarding social and economic policy. Our entrance into the Eurozone is one such case in point, in which the majority of small and medium sized businesses will suffer not because of the Eurozone itself, but becuase, as in Greece, the government and the political parties, are incapable of treating a purely economic issue apolitically. Planning for the Eurozone, "on-the-ground" is a joke, with the local banks doing more to inform the average business owner than the government itself. Most Cypriots are not prepared for the inevitable inflation spike which comes with Eurozone entry.
My point in all this is that political Cyprus is a beast that cannot be tamed for the time being, and we all suffer because of it silently.
Perhaps, and I say this with trebidation, global warming may break the political fabric in Cyprus as its results begin to truly impede on the Cypriot quality of life vis a vis more extreme (and less livable) climatic swings ... in our case in Cyprus even hotter summers.
Also perhaps the political wagon will lose some steam if the occupied part of Cyprus gains international recognition as a "Meditteranean Taiwan", which would immediately disprove the value of the political party engine system.
But, one must also keep in mind that they are truly everywhere... like you said there isn't a rock to hide under when it comes to the presence of the political parties.
My prediction is that the beast will gain even more strength in these upcoming elections because I suspect that Chrisophias, a long-time political sleeping giant, will run for president against Papadopoulos using the backfiring of the Eurozone to cross party lines.
... congrats on the blog!
-Panos
@basil Welcome to the blogosphere Basil, it was about time.
@hellenic nationalist
I believe it is important to welcome NGOs of all shapes and sizes, affiliations, political colourings etc. for a number of reasons.
1) The presence of NGOs is a sign of a mature and healthy political cultures. Countries banning and dispruving NGOs are authoritarian or quasi-authoritarian by nature (China, Burma, Cuba, Russia, N. Korea and the like).
2) NGOs can often provide valuable and impartial service to society, such as the Red Cross, Amnesty International, Consumer/Price Control groups, Medicines Sans Frontiers and many other come to mind. Indeed every organisation has its own agenda, sometimes supporting our views, sometimes against them, and sometimes challenging them. Just because you disagree with one university that favored the Anan Plan doesn't mean that the country is going to the dogs; on the contrary, you can support other NGOs that were against the plan.
3) NGOs allow citizens to be actively involved with issues close to their hearts (single-issue activism) but their are distrustful or sceptical about political parties. Powerful NGOs can act as pressure lobbies to the governments and help them see another point of view.
Yes, some NGOs are notoriously corrupted or mismanaged, and yes, some NGOs can be too provocative but that is no reason to reject NGOs as a whole. In a democracy we have to take the bad with the good, oust politicians we dislike and vote the ones we do like, while organising ourselves at the civil level either by participating through an NGO (humanitarian, charity, civil, political, single-issue etc) or in their absence, start our own.
I agree with the suggestion that the political party system is dominant in Cyprus, and that this poses problems.
I do not agree, however, with the suggestion that NGOs and civil society simply do not exist. in my job, I come in contact with such groups daily (divorsed women, greens, hunters, rheumatopathy patients, you name it.)
The problem, I think, lies precisely in the non-existence of a strong quasi-academic community and independent think tanks. No think tank is unbiased, to be sure, but they still serve an important purpose.
If a democratic way of life is based on a dynamic public discourse, on the exchange of opinions, on the existence of an open "marketplace of ideas", then we need a constant feed into this public debate. In this context,I would argue that independent think tanks serve a fundamental purpose in articulating new ideas, new approaches to issues, new solutions, and then disseminating them. If they are wrong, then it is up to their intellectual competitors to expose this.
The problem is not Soros, I think, and not with the places like Portland State. They are promoting their point of view. The problem, rather, is the complete absense of a vibrant reply to them; a well-articulated, substantiated reply that will disprove their ideas.
The coutries in which we see significant problems develop in the political world, are those in which a REAL debate is absent. This of the way in which the current US administration has tried to discredit those that disagree with it, rather than reply to their arguments -and the US is sadly not alone in this shift from debate to controlled discourse.
In this context, I would prefer to have BOTH the metaphorical Soros and an intellectually vibrant counterpart ot him, than no discourse at all.
The role of parties is to participate in government, not to develop ideas. As the PM of Luxembourg said about the Lisbon program, "we know what to do, but we do not know how to win the next elections if we do it". Parties need to win elections because simply their voice depends on it. Think tanks, on the other hand, are ON THE LONG RUN judged solely by the quality of their analyses. And therein lies the difference..
Just some thoughts...
Michalis
Hi Basil and all the best to your blog.
For those of us who have been living in Cyprus for some years, it's obvious that apart from the status quo of the Turkish occupation, there is also an equally dangerous social standstill. People are not willing to actively pursue collective goals, despite knowing and feeling that there is plenty to be done to improve society. This attitude will hopefully change with time, especially under EU influence, but for now things look gloomy.
Back in 2004, Basil was one of the first in Cyprus to propose social structures such as NGOs as a means of promoting social interests outside of political parties. His excellent study, part of a book on "Mass Media and Foreign Policy", can be found online, in Greek, at http://www.iepem.org .
What makes people feel hopeless and unwilling to act? That I think is the consequence of a widespread belief that no matter how hard we try and how much time we spend, the "system" is so powerful that cannot be changed. This stereotype is cunningly perpetuated by political leaders, in order to undermine any attempt to remove them from power, e.g. by letting huge white collar crimes unpunished.
So the first step in any attempt for social action must be that people believe in their power and realize that things can change.
What you are saying Basil is very interesting but you should not forget the interconnection between political power and the socioeconimic status in Cyprus.For example to even think about challenging the present rotten state of affairs one should have plenty of funds to get their message through. Bear in mind that all the media are directly or indirectly controlled by the big economic interests on the island who support them financially in different ways. Also remember that the state and some political parties are the biggest employers on the island and noone would bite the hand that feeds them. You will also agree that no single party sticks to any sort of ideology these days and political parties are simply conglomerates of economic interest and corruption. I mean who would ever have thought that with AKEL in power so many economic measures against the interests of the majority of the population would have been adopted, like the unilateral imposition of working conditions and pay to employees without the employees having any way of reacting.And then there is the question of would organise a move against all that without considerable personal cost and victimisation? It is a common secret that even the courts are ruling against the small fish but never against the big ones.Look at what happened with the stock exchange scandal and the Helios aircraft tragedy. I think a big chunk of the people realize that we live in a democratic dictatorship. A situation where potentially the rule of law is implemented only if you can pull the right strings but in practice most people can do very little. If the ombudsman is ignoring citizens' complaints for years without any answer whatsoever. So is there any hope from within? I doubt it
Post a Comment